3 ms·

Protections? Tell that to all of the "full-time" workers that were laid off within days of the economic crash. If the money isn't coming into the business, it w

Protections? Tell that to all of the "full-time" workers that were laid off within days of the economic crash. If the money isn't coming into the business, it won't be going out of the business in paychecks. Period. You can wave your hands about magical "protections" but accounting is the real master. Gig work lets the businesses and the workers adapt weekly, daily or even hourly. Full-time work is onerous to startup and so businesses wait until they're desperate before hiring anyone. You would do the same. None of us have extra cash to toss around.

kube-system 7y ago
> Protections? Tell that to all of the "full-time" workers that were laid off within days of the economic crash. Full time employees get benefits like unemployment, health insurance, COBRA, FICA contributions etc. And tons of other legal protections that contractors do not normally get.
- tathougies 7y ago
  Unemployment though is structured as an insurance. Those employees pay unemployment premiums. There is no reason (other than a sloppy tax code) why the same thing couldn't be asked of gig workers (who do have to pay tax on their earnings anyway).
- bhupy 7y ago
  > Full time employees get benefits like unemployment, health insurance, COBRA, FICA contributions etc. A huge part of the problem is that full-time employees get benefits like health insurance and COBRA. They're all band-aids on top of one cardinal sin: that benefits are tied to employment. We don't really talk about employees receiving car insurance benefits, or food benefits, or housing benefits.
  - kube-system 7y ago
    > We don't really talk about employees receiving car insurance benefits, or food benefits, or housing benefits. I don't know why we don't talk about them, but it's not because they don't exist. These benefits aren't even really uncommon. They're just more frequently called: 'company cars', 'employee meals', and 'corporate housing'.
    - bhupy 7y ago
      > They're just more frequently called: 'company cars', 'employee meals', and 'corporate housing'. Sure, and we are fortunate that such perks are in-frequent, and unexpected. In a world where that's not the case, cars, food, and housing would be prohibitively expensive to those that are unemployed, and we would call for nationalization of the auto, food, and real estate industries.
      - kube-system 7y ago
        It depends on the industry, but in some, they are expected and often needed: i.e. food service. I don't think we should have employer provided health insurance. But if the topic of discussion is a comparison of W2 and 1099 work, that is an obvious point of differentiation.
        bhupy 7y ago
        It is an obvious point of differentiation, and the 2 major camps of this debate are “1099’s should get the same benefits as W2’s” vs “the differentiation between 1099’s and W2’s should not matter because W2’s should not be expected to receive those benefits from their employers in the first place”
        kube-system 7y ago
        I always thought the largest camp was neither of those, but: "independent contractors are a real thing, but Uber drivers are not that" Uber's rules do not stack up too well against these guidelines unless you have some creative interpretation: https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/independent-contractor-self-employed-or-employee https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...
        bhupy 7y ago
        Sure, I think the “Uber drivers should be W2’s” an extension of “1099’s should receive the same benefits as W2’s” camp. If you don’t agree with that framing, then I would argue that the 2 camps are: “Uber drivers are not independent contractors and should receive W2’s” Vs “Even if Uber drivers Are not independent contractors, they should be treated like employees AND employees should be functionally indistinguishable from contractors for the purposes of benefits”
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  > Full time employees get benefits like unemployment, health insurance, COBRA, FICA contributions etc. And tons of other legal protections that contractors do not normally get. They do not if the employer has fewer than 50 employees. Which is a huge portion of low paying jobs. FICA contributions have nothing to do with full time employment, nor are they benefits people are eligible for before retirement age.
  - kube-system 7y ago
    72% of workers are covered by the employer mandate. And it was merely one example out of a list of differentiators. >FICA contributions have nothing to do with full time employment Employers have to pay part of the FICA contributions for the W2 employees. 1099 employees have to pay all of this out of their own pocket via the SE tax.
    - lotsofpulp 7y ago
      I assumed by specifying full time employment you were referring to differences between full time and part time employment, not full time and independent contractor.

kube-system 7y ago

> Protections? Tell that to all of the "full-time" workers that were laid off within days of the economic crash. Full time employees get benefits like unemployment, health insurance, COBRA, FICA contributions etc. And tons of other legal protections that contractors do not normally get.

tathougies 7y ago
Unemployment though is structured as an insurance. Those employees pay unemployment premiums. There is no reason (other than a sloppy tax code) why the same thing couldn't be asked of gig workers (who do have to pay tax on their earnings anyway).
bhupy 7y ago
> Full time employees get benefits like unemployment, health insurance, COBRA, FICA contributions etc. A huge part of the problem is that full-time employees get benefits like health insurance and COBRA. They're all band-aids on top of one cardinal sin: that benefits are tied to employment. We don't really talk about employees receiving car insurance benefits, or food benefits, or housing benefits.
- kube-system 7y ago
  > We don't really talk about employees receiving car insurance benefits, or food benefits, or housing benefits. I don't know why we don't talk about them, but it's not because they don't exist. These benefits aren't even really uncommon. They're just more frequently called: 'company cars', 'employee meals', and 'corporate housing'.
  - bhupy 7y ago
    > They're just more frequently called: 'company cars', 'employee meals', and 'corporate housing'. Sure, and we are fortunate that such perks are in-frequent, and unexpected. In a world where that's not the case, cars, food, and housing would be prohibitively expensive to those that are unemployed, and we would call for nationalization of the auto, food, and real estate industries.
    - kube-system 7y ago
      It depends on the industry, but in some, they are expected and often needed: i.e. food service. I don't think we should have employer provided health insurance. But if the topic of discussion is a comparison of W2 and 1099 work, that is an obvious point of differentiation.
      - bhupy 7y ago
        It is an obvious point of differentiation, and the 2 major camps of this debate are “1099’s should get the same benefits as W2’s” vs “the differentiation between 1099’s and W2’s should not matter because W2’s should not be expected to receive those benefits from their employers in the first place”
        kube-system 7y ago
        I always thought the largest camp was neither of those, but: "independent contractors are a real thing, but Uber drivers are not that" Uber's rules do not stack up too well against these guidelines unless you have some creative interpretation: https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/independent-contractor-self-employed-or-employee https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...
        bhupy 7y ago
        Sure, I think the “Uber drivers should be W2’s” an extension of “1099’s should receive the same benefits as W2’s” camp. If you don’t agree with that framing, then I would argue that the 2 camps are: “Uber drivers are not independent contractors and should receive W2’s” Vs “Even if Uber drivers Are not independent contractors, they should be treated like employees AND employees should be functionally indistinguishable from contractors for the purposes of benefits”
lotsofpulp 7y ago
> Full time employees get benefits like unemployment, health insurance, COBRA, FICA contributions etc. And tons of other legal protections that contractors do not normally get. They do not if the employer has fewer than 50 employees. Which is a huge portion of low paying jobs. FICA contributions have nothing to do with full time employment, nor are they benefits people are eligible for before retirement age.
- kube-system 7y ago
  72% of workers are covered by the employer mandate. And it was merely one example out of a list of differentiators. >FICA contributions have nothing to do with full time employment Employers have to pay part of the FICA contributions for the W2 employees. 1099 employees have to pay all of this out of their own pocket via the SE tax.
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    I assumed by specifying full time employment you were referring to differences between full time and part time employment, not full time and independent contractor.